It is worth noting that atheists of various sorts have been uncomfortable with the big bang theory for a very long time, and often predicted its demise. Yet since then, measurements and observations have been consistent with the big bang concept. Their position is untenable, especially those who “cry from the rooftops” that they are driven solely by observation, testing and measurement.
I have provided extracts of a letter to Nature by, of all people, a person in humanities and social sciences, dated 1990, to illustrate that their arguments have not changed, even though data and measurements have demonstrated the strength of the big bang – ironic, me thinks.
Just to add to the view that a beginning as a scientific observation is difficult, I add this: a beginning includes time-space, and a primordial “atom” needs to be considered as a “point” of commencement. The maths for this is truly esoteric and beyond my training.
Arguments that amount to, “we do not know, therefore we would say this and that” are beyond spurious and hint at a desperation by atheists.
My comments are meant to show those interested, that we cannot go beyond what is observed by scientists, and to differentiate accepted data from ramped speculation.
I have also pointed out that we may contemplate the doctrine of creation from nothing, without feeling we are in conflict with what science has observed. It is disappointing to note that this is taken by some to be “mixing theology and science” – it is clear that this statement is a false presentation of my comment.